Religious supremacy remains an issue on the left.
Last summer, I joined the Democratic Socialists of America to connect with like-minded individuals, and I am glad I did.
However, I happened across an article by Geoffrey Kurtz titled, “What Religious Socialists Bring to Our Table.”
Kurtz should have titled it “Why Eurocentric Christian Socialists Are Superior in My Very Wrong Opinion” because it relied on bigoted stereotypes of non-religious people to make its point while simultaneously assuming that all religions follow a Christian or Abrahamic model.
Kurtz insisted that “Christian socialists have offered a moral critique of capitalism.” This in turn suggests that non-religious socialists cannot offer moral critiques of capitalism. It is not unusual for the religious to consider the nonreligious as incapable of discerning moral behavior.
Kurtz also claimed that “Christian socialists have attended to the problem of hope.” This in turn suggests that nonreligious socialists cannot offer hope. The religious often equate belief in their particular version of gods or afterlife to hope, but the nonreligious are not hopeless people. The only thing that may feel hopeless is the bigotry faced due to our non-religious identities.
He brought up other points rooted in anti-nonreligious rhetoric before attempting to do damage control by claiming that these are not unique to Christian or religious socialists, but then, he turned around and claimed that “it is probably not a coincidence that religious socialists have been among the most consistent voices for these concerns.”
I have no issue with religious socialists reaching out within their communities to build a socialist society, but why throw nonreligious people under the bus?
This is not simply a sentiment shared by Kurtz alone. And it is not just a DSA issue.
Last October, I attended a rally for reproductive rights in downtown St. Louis. I figured it was reasonable to assume that most of its attendees were probably left-leaning (at least more so than the Missouri GOP).
A few speakers, such as Karla May of the Missouri Senate, tried connecting Jesus, God, or religion to reproductive rights. The moment I heard the religious talk, I checked out. But I was not the only person who was alienated. Before, the crowd clapped and cheered as speakers addressed the injustices in reproductive health, but during the Christian banter, the crowd was notably less energized.
Not everyone is Christian, let alone religious. Furthermore, Christianity was already being used by Missouri Republicans to justify abuses of power, we do not need to mix more religion in the public sphere. Not even if it is presented as progressive.
Even though most non-religious people fall on the political left, including atheists who often rank themselves as more left-leaning than the Democratic party, it seems the religious left still finds ways to demonize and alienate the nonreligious. Meanwhile, the nonreligious left is expected to walk on eggshells to respect religious sentiments.
Many leftist spaces may feel especially unwelcoming for nonreligious leftists who come from minority religious or ethnic backgrounds. This may be due to the assumption that particular minority groups are inherently religious. Meanwhile, nonreligious people, particularly atheists, are assumed to be edgy white men with a Christian background. Otherwise, if they are not white, they are “colonized,” i.e., despite most major religions being spread via colonialism and imperialism, but I digress.
These assumptions are often used to justify bigotry towards nonreligious people, and they make it unsafe for some nonreligious people to be their full selves.
If the religious left wants the support of the nonreligious (and they should want our support since we tend to be among the most politically active and influential on the left), they should acknowledge that religion does not belong in any just government, nor should it be used to divide as we organize.
Furthermore, religious leftists should address injustices due to religious supremacy both domestically and globally. I see justified outrage at those who face injustice due to their religion, e.g., the enslaved Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, China, but I rarely see this same outrage for those who face injustice due to their nonreligion or atheism, e.g., Soheil Arabi in Iran. They should address the injustices faced by non-religious refugees who flee persecution as strongly as they rightly do for other groups.
The left must recognize nonreligious people as a marginalized group in the context of the United States. Not only because we make up only about twenty percent of the population, but because our representation in government is extremely disproportional. The current U.S. Congress has only two openly nonreligious members out of five hundred thirty-five total members. No member currently identifies as an atheist. Few have done so historically.
The left could truly live up to its ideals of equality and justice when the religious are no longer prioritized over the nonreligious. Until then, we have a long way to go.
